Skip to main content

High court to look at Michigan ban on preferences in university admissions

By Bill Mears, CNN Supreme Court Producer
March 25, 2013 -- Updated 1551 GMT (2351 HKT)
The Supreme Court Justices will decide the constitutionality high-profile challenge to affirmative action.
The Supreme Court Justices will decide the constitutionality high-profile challenge to affirmative action.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Michigan bans race- and sex-based discrimination in university admissions
  • A federal appeals court last year concluded the 2006 ban violates the U.S. Constitution
  • Attorney: "This is a tremendous day for black and Latino students in the entire country"
  • State: The ban embodies the fundamental premise of what America is all about

Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court agreed Monday to confront another high-profile challenge to affirmative action in college admissions.

The justices will decide the constitutionality of a voter referendum in Michigan banning race- and sex-based discrimination or preferential treatment in public university admission decisions.

The high court is currently deciding a separate challenge to admissions policies at the University of Texas, which did not involve a voter referendum.

Sonia Sotomayor: I was an alien
SCOTUS to hear affirmative action case
Is affirmative action constitutional?
SCOTUS to hear affirmative action case

A federal appeals court last year concluded the affirmative action ban, which Michigan voters passed in a 2006 referendum, violated the U.S. Constitution's equal protection laws.

Appeals court strikes down Michigan's affirmative action ban

It was the latest step in a legal and political battle over whether the state's colleges can use race and gender as a factor in choosing which students to admit. The ban's opponents say classroom diversity remains a necessary government role.

"We think this is a tremendous victory for the tens and hundreds of thousands of students who fought for affirmative action for decades," said Michigan attorney George Washington when the 6th Circuit ruling came out in November. He represents the By Any Means Necessary coalition that sued to overturn the ban.

"This is a tremendous day for black and Latino students in the entire country," Washington added.

The office of Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette will defend the ban when oral arguments are held in the fall.

The ban "embodies the fundamental premise of what America is all about: equal opportunity under the law," Schuette said. "Entrance to our great universities must be based upon merit."

The law was passed seven years ago with support of 58% of voters. It was added to the state's constitution, and bars publicly funded colleges from granting "preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin."

Opinion: Keep affirmative action but reform it

That prompted a series of lawsuits and appeals from various groups.

Michigan voters approved the ban after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that while Michigan universities could use race as a factor in choosing which students to admit, they could not make race the determining factor in deciding whether applicants are accepted

The referendum effort was led by Jennifer Gratz, who was at the center of the high court case. As a white student, she was put on the waiting list for undergraduate admission to the state's largest university. She eventually attended another school, and became the lead plaintiff in a subsequent discrimination lawsuit.

After the Supreme Court's 2003 decision, she began a public campaign to end racial preferences in admissions.

The Michigan ban also prohibits the state from considering race and gender in public hiring and public contracting decisions. But the current high court case deals only with the college admissions portion.

Efforts over decades to create a diverse classroom have been controversial. The Brown v. Board of Education high court ruling in 1954 ended segregation of public schools, but sparked nationwide protests and disobedience by states who initially refused to integrate.

In the 1978 Bakke case, the Supreme Court ruled universities have a compelling state interest in promoting diversity, and that allows for the use of affirmative action. That issue involved a discrimination claim by a white man denied admission to law school.

Opinion: Chief justice out to end affirmative action

The Supreme Court is now considering whether the University of Texas' admissions practices aimed at creating campus diversity violate the rights of some white applicants. Arguments were held in October and a written ruling is pending.

The high court under Chief Justice John Roberts has made the issue a key part of its docket in recent years, and it could serve as a major legacy of the current conservative majority.

The justices in 2007 struck down public school choice plans in Seattle and Louisville, concluding race could not be a factor in the assignment of children to schools. Those school districts had sought to use raced-based criteria to achieve diversity.

The issue in recent years is whether and when affirmative action programs -- while constitutionally permissible now -- would eventually have to be phased out as the goal of obtaining diversity is met.

Now-retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor -- who wrote the key ruling a decade ago in the initial Michigan cases -- said, "The court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today."

The justices are now being asked once again to decide whether Michigan's current policy meets that legal and social test.

The case is Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary (12-682).

Opinion: Taking affirmative action personally

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
December 16, 2014 -- Updated 2245 GMT (0645 HKT)
Pakistan Taliban say the school attack was revenge for the killing of children in a military offensive -- but they are being pressed by defections to ISIS.
A group that claims it hacked Sony Pictures has posted a public threat against moviegoers who see Sony's "The Interview."
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 0243 GMT (1043 HKT)
The gunman behind the deadly siege in Sydney this week was not on a security watch list, and Australia's Prime Minister wants to know why.
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 0948 GMT (1748 HKT)
Bestselling author Marjorie Liu had set her sights on being a lawyer, but realized it wasn't what she wanted to do for the rest of her life.
December 16, 2014 -- Updated 2027 GMT (0427 HKT)
CNN's Matthew Chance looks into an HRW report saying Russia has "legalized discrimination against LGBT people."
December 16, 2014 -- Updated 0212 GMT (1012 HKT)
The Sydney siege has brought home some troubling truths to Australians. They are not immune to what are often called "lone-wolf" terror attacks.
December 16, 2014 -- Updated 0012 GMT (0812 HKT)
A social media campaign condemning Islamophobia under the hashtag #illridewithyou has taken off after Sydney hostage siege.
Bill Cosby has kept quiet as sexual assault allegations mounted against him, but his wife, Camille, finally spoke out in defense of her husband.
December 15, 2014 -- Updated 1144 GMT (1944 HKT)
China-bound AirAsia flight turns back to Bangkok after passenger throws water over crew member.
December 15, 2014 -- Updated 1026 GMT (1826 HKT)
It takes Nepalese eye doctor, Sanduk Ruit about five minutes to change someone's life.
December 16, 2014 -- Updated 1054 GMT (1854 HKT)
This epic journey crosses 13,000 kilometers, eight countries over 21 days. Find out where.
December 19, 2014 -- Updated 1431 GMT (2231 HKT)
Each day, CNN brings you an image capturing a moment to remember, defining the present in our changing world.
Browse through images from CNN teams around the world that you don't always see on news reports.
ADVERTISEMENT